I'm anxiously awaiting an iPhone

AT&T as a captive carrier

You know, I really don't care for Apple and I tend to think that most of their products are more marketing success then actual functionality, but even so you can't really blame them for AT&T being a captive carrier. That's the way the damn cell industry works in the United States. The carriers have all the power. Ever tried to create an app for a cell phone? Ever tried to do something in the interest of your users and not in the interest of the carriers? Good luck!

Verizon and AT&T rank as the least friendly carriers to do business with -- both for developers and for their end users. Crippled phones, disabled features, draconian terms of service, etc, etc, etc. Sprint is slightly better and T-Mobile USA is probably the most friendly but even they pale in comparison to the freedom of choice that exists in the rest of the World.

I would encourage everybody to go read this [newamerica.net] document. It explains how the industry works and advocates for an adoption of wireless network neutrality and applying the carterphone rules to the wireless industry. There is simply no excuse for why I can't just go down to Wally World, buy any phone I want (from a $20 el-cheapo POS to a $600 PDA), plug my SIM card (or RUIM card for CDMA) into it and use it.

In my opinion, I highly beg to differ (this post is long, so please bare with me if you want).

Apple.com has this introductory product description:

Let's look into this for a moment. Keep in mind that Apple is most likely targeting or at least attempting to re-acquire most of the audience that also bought their iPod products:

For us "geeks," this phone is probably nothing but the ordinary. We have already seen devices that surpass their "revolutionary" claims, at least specification wise. But it has no physical keypad. This is important. How usable is this "screen keypad" (something that has been tried, and has failed, before) and how well will the public receive it? I honestly expect that this technology is indeed "revolutionary," since their staple claims are normally their strongest and perform undoubtedly better than their competitors.

So Apple could market this as a quasi-evolutionary, no -revolutionary, upgrade to their current iPod line and possibly garner their old audience. Or they could entice the many who have been wishing for a touch-screen iPod with widescreen (the Zune finally dies here) with this product and let them have a phone on the side. Speaking as a "geek," I know I've seen oodles of phones with music players and MP3 capability, but it would be a lie for me to say that the majority of them are worth replacing an iPod or similar (for reference, check the RAZR with iTunes line and see what I mean...)

Many people here have already bashed this phone for its somewhat antiquated connections to the Internet. But how many people in the United States use the full power of mobile internet on their phone? I know few who do more than purchase ringtones and other commodities for their device (if even that), and maybe do a quick search for something of the moment, like movie times (which are carrier-catered in most cases). The iPhone integrates this experience straight into the UI so a normal person doesn't even have to really open a browser to do the simple things. Want to search for a location? Just "tap" the search button. Need to find movie times? Can probably be configured there too. I wouldn't even be surprised if there is are OS-wide search functions built-in, which is something that few, if any, independent phone carriers have been able to accomplish (at least not with smartphones, which are still in their infancy).

Its obvious that the iPhone is up against lots of veterans in the field. But Apple is the MASTER of usability, which is what makes the bulk of the phone experience. This phone should and deserves to do very well.